MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323364363 · doi:10.1186/s12875-023-02022-8

Development of the Cardiovascular Assessment Screening Program (CASP) using the qualitative findings of a mixed methods study and applying the TDF to address the barriers of and facilitators to comprehensive screening for cardiovascular disease

2023· article· en· W4323364363 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jill Bruneau, Karen Parsons, Donna Moralejo, Catherine Donovan

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Primary Care · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealth Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNewfoundland and Labrador Centre for Applied Health Research
KeywordsCASPFocus groupIntervention (counseling)Qualitative researchGrounded theoryExploratory researchMedicineFidelityHealth careMedical educationNursingPsychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There is inconsistent utilisation of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for cardiovascular disease (CVD) screening and management by healthcare professionals to identify CVD risk factors early and to intervene using current recommendations. This manuscript reports on the first phase of an exploratory sequential mixed methods study describing the integration of the qualitative study findings with the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) that led to the development of the Cardiovascular Assessment Screening Program (CASP). The main objective of the qualitative study was to inform the development of CASP. METHODS: Focus groups (5) and interviews (10) were conducted in rural and urban settings in one Canadian province with target health professionals, managers in health care organizations, and the public to obtain different perspectives to inform the CASP intervention. Three focus groups were held with nurse practitioners and two with members of the public; individual interviews were conducted with target groups as well. Application of the TDF provided a comprehensive approach to determine the main factors influencing clinician behaviour, to assess the implementation process, and to support intervention design. Behaviour change techniques, modes of delivery, and intervention components were selected for the development of the CASP. RESULTS: Themes identified such lack of knowledge about comprehensive screening, ambiguity around responsibility for screening, lack of time and commitment to screening were addressed in the components of the CASP intervention that were developed, including a website, education module, decision tools, and a toolkit. CONCLUSION: CASP is a theory-informed intervention developed through the integration of the findings from the focus groups and interviews with selected TDF domains, behaviour change techniques, and modes of delivery available in the local context that may be a useful approach for knowledge translation of evidence into practice.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.137
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.321 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Primary CareSame topicHealth Promotion and Cardiovascular PreventionFrench-language works237,207